A draw should capture the castle.
If a draw would succesfully defend it , it would indeed be very hard to win the castle from a high rated player.
If a draw captures the castle, there is no need to make it rating-dependent.
I also have an idea for a variant : a castle being defended by one player playing against the whole red hot pawn community.
Community votes a move.
To keep Russ at work 😀
Draw should hold it. Not only does the attacker have white, but he gets draws? He doesn't even have to win? A draw is a satisfactory result for black! 😀
Originally posted by !~TONY~! Draw should hold it. Not only does the attacker have white, but he gets draws? He doesn't even have to win? A draw is a satisfactory result for black! 😀
I guess some one should determine exactly what the terms are for a draw. Do the players decide the outcome, or should the game be scrutinized by the community to determine if it is technicaly drawn. I think that true draws are pretty rare. In most cases I think that if the person working to get the draw could have won. It takes alot of thinking to get there.
Originally posted by Russ Question: Can one person occupy more than one castle? Yes, each castle is unrelated to all others.
Question:Can one person join a single queue several times? You can only be in each queue once. If you are at the board, then you may not join the queue again until you have been defeated.
-Russ
Excellent. Thanks Russ!
By the way, I failed to mention before that I think the whole Siege thing rocks.
What is a draw can be determined in the usual way.
From a sort of philosophical angle, I feel a draw means a successful defense, because the attacker failed to overcome the defender. The defender saved his game and 'held the fort.' As a practical matter, the possibility of a very strong player holding a castle almost indefinitely exists no matter which way draws go, so I find that an unconvincing reason to give draws to the attacker. Finally, the most important consideration is which way will be most entertaining, and it's a question of balance. Personally I feel a better balance between capture rates and occupation durations would be reached with draws going in Black's favor.
Originally posted by rapalla7 I guess some one should determine exactly what the terms are for a draw. Do the players decide the outcome, or should the game be scrutinized by the community to determine if it is technicaly drawn. I think that true draws are pretty rare. In most cases I think that if the person working to get the draw could have won. It takes alot of thinking to get there.
Mike
A draw is a draw man. The players decide the outcome by playing out the game to the best of their abilities, and if it's a draw then so be it. Whether you think draws are rare or not is an opinion, some people are more prone than others. One person doesn't work to get a draw, both people contribute equally to the outcome, therefore it's a fair result!
To overthrow a reigning king you should better him (or her) not just be as good as. Therefore I agree with Hunting Bear, a challenger should win to take a castle. Otherwise the new champion who gets in by a draw is no better than the previous champion.
If it takes a win to capture the castle, all castles will be held by top players in no time. Nothing to be captured after a few months.
In a few months time the castles will become just slaughterhouses for weaker players.
Or maybe the top players will siege each other and see who can hold most castles ?
The siege should be more than a way to identify the top players - we
know already who they are by looking at the ranking.
I am convinced it will be more fun for more people if a draw captures the castle. Although i must admit it sounds less romantic.
Originally posted by Nohup If it takes a win to capture the castle, all castles will be held by top players in no time. Nothing to be captured after a few months.
In a few months time the castles will become just slaughterhouses for weaker players.
Or maybe the top players will siege each other and see who can hold most castles ?
The siege should be more than a way to identify the t ...[text shortened]... for more people if a draw captures the castle. Although i must admit it sounds less romantic.
The castles all could be occupied by top players very quickly one way or the other.
Consider a hypothetical case of two equally rated players. In that case would it be better for draws to go to Black or to White? I prefer Black, because in the case of two equally rated players I'd prefer to see the defense of the castle a more likely result.
Again, in a case of a very strong player against a much weaker player, I don't think the draw issue is very likely to matter at all. What if I were to play Mr. Tebb? I promise you that whether draws go in my favor or not would be irrelevant 🙂
Originally posted by Nohup If it takes a win to capture the castle, all castles will be held by top players in no time. Nothing to be captured after a few months.
In a few months time the castles will become just slaughterhouses for weaker players.
Or maybe the top players will siege each other and see who can hold most castles ?
The siege should be more than a way to identify the t ...[text shortened]... for more people if a draw captures the castle. Although i must admit it sounds less romantic.
This is the crux of the matter. Not whether a draw wins the castle or not, but a method of avoiding having the strongest players totally dominate the sieges.
I think the suggestion that the different colours represent different rating ranges is good. e.g.
Well, I chose to have a draw as a capture so we always favour the attacker. (For the reason others have stated - to help stop complete domination by the stronger players)
I’ll let this thread run a little longer and decide tomorrow.
* Siege games started
09 Dec '03 13:30
Back to Top